Tom CravenParliament Needs Urgent Tweaking
May 11th 2008 09:39
Parliament is supposed to be the start and end of society, but it is riddled with errors and needs urgent reform.
Parliament is supposed be made up of parliamentarians who represent their individual communities, this role has changed so much over time that MP’s (especially in Federal Parliament) rarely represent their local community. Individual MP’s usually act to represent their party and its policy. Obviously acting when within the bounds of party policy MP’s are restricted to what they can do for their local areas. MP’s become subordinate to party discipline, but this subordination also extends to the executives power over MPs. Due to the executive’s power and party alliances, parliament has in some ways become little more than a rubber stamp for the public record which leaves the real governance to the executive.
Anthony Smith who authored ‘Parliament Degraded’ states that ‘all aspects of the institution are decaying’, he refers explicitly to the legislative and debating functions, question time, the presiding officers, accountability as well as language and behavior. He argues that Parliament is nothing more than a theatrical society which gives the impression that governance is actually taking place but in actual fact the only governance is that of the Cabinet behind close doors.
Parliament’s decline is also demonstrated by the actual parliamentarians themselves. Roughly 75% of parliamentarians are men, but only 50% of the population are men. Men are over represented by 25% and women under represented by 25%, it should be noted however that parliament since its beginning has never had a fair quota of men and women. So this can not be a real argument for the decline of parliament rather a flaw of parliament that has never been repaired. Perhaps a more convincing argument for the decline of parliament is instead how parliamentarians are selected. Often parties will put second rate candidates up for election just because they are popular or have a name (Peter Garret)or have beaten other opponents through branch stacking in pre-selection. A modern example of poor selection of candidate is that of Alex Hawke. Alex Hawke is the former president of the Young Liberals who some say invited ‘friends’ into Alan Cadman’s seat of Mitchell in NSW with the specific purpose of ousting him. Alan Cadman has been the sitting member since 1974 but was ousted out by Hawke in 2007 in what can only be described as a mean case of ‘branch stacking’. Cadman was popular within his electorate and in most people’s opinions had done a good job, Hawke has just moved to electorate and branch stacked his way to the top, kicking out a sitting MP of over 30 years. These dirty tactics and poor selection of candidate for parliament, are a convincing argument for its decline.
The Revival of Parliament has been spoken about in recent times, many people state that the revival of the Senate Committee’s are proof of parliament’s revival as well as the prevalence of minor parties holding the balance of power. Another argument is the new founded popularity of Question Time and debate. All though these arguments appear convincing, in reality they are far less so. Although minor parties occasionally do hold the balance of power their effects on legislation are at best minimal, John Cain (premier of Victorian in late 80s and early 90s) proved that ‘selective proclamation’ was an effective way of getting around minor parties, this technique could be used in Federal Parliament quite easily, the people’s mandate is another way of discounting minor parties. The Senate power is often overstated despite it sometimes being seen as the ‘2nd coming of Parliament, A,Smith’. Earlier this year with WorkChoices the Senate proved that it will always bow to the Lower House no matter what. Committee’s in the Senate have improved but its recommendations are not always acted upon, the Republic and New Zealand Committee Reports are proof of this. Finally Question time may look impressive but as Smith points out its ineffective and demonstrates the lack of behavior and respect in parliament which further leads to its decline.
Sometimes its seems unpopular to support the ‘Decline Of Parliament’ thesis but all facts support this belief. The Revival Of Parliament is something that we would all like to believe in, but the decline in the lower house far outweighs the ‘revival’ in the upper house (Also let us not forget that the Senate also has party loyalty problems and its real role as a ‘States House’ was destroyed long ago, the supposed revival of the Senate will never justify its destruction as the ‘States House’). Reform is needed to counter the decline but party loyalty and constitutional change measures will always halt this. Parliaments role will always be a changing one, but in this case it has changed for the worse.
Parliament is supposed be made up of parliamentarians who represent their individual communities, this role has changed so much over time that MP’s (especially in Federal Parliament) rarely represent their local community. Individual MP’s usually act to represent their party and its policy. Obviously acting when within the bounds of party policy MP’s are restricted to what they can do for their local areas. MP’s become subordinate to party discipline, but this subordination also extends to the executives power over MPs. Due to the executive’s power and party alliances, parliament has in some ways become little more than a rubber stamp for the public record which leaves the real governance to the executive.
Anthony Smith who authored ‘Parliament Degraded’ states that ‘all aspects of the institution are decaying’, he refers explicitly to the legislative and debating functions, question time, the presiding officers, accountability as well as language and behavior. He argues that Parliament is nothing more than a theatrical society which gives the impression that governance is actually taking place but in actual fact the only governance is that of the Cabinet behind close doors.
Parliament’s decline is also demonstrated by the actual parliamentarians themselves. Roughly 75% of parliamentarians are men, but only 50% of the population are men. Men are over represented by 25% and women under represented by 25%, it should be noted however that parliament since its beginning has never had a fair quota of men and women. So this can not be a real argument for the decline of parliament rather a flaw of parliament that has never been repaired. Perhaps a more convincing argument for the decline of parliament is instead how parliamentarians are selected. Often parties will put second rate candidates up for election just because they are popular or have a name (Peter Garret)or have beaten other opponents through branch stacking in pre-selection. A modern example of poor selection of candidate is that of Alex Hawke. Alex Hawke is the former president of the Young Liberals who some say invited ‘friends’ into Alan Cadman’s seat of Mitchell in NSW with the specific purpose of ousting him. Alan Cadman has been the sitting member since 1974 but was ousted out by Hawke in 2007 in what can only be described as a mean case of ‘branch stacking’. Cadman was popular within his electorate and in most people’s opinions had done a good job, Hawke has just moved to electorate and branch stacked his way to the top, kicking out a sitting MP of over 30 years. These dirty tactics and poor selection of candidate for parliament, are a convincing argument for its decline.
The Revival of Parliament has been spoken about in recent times, many people state that the revival of the Senate Committee’s are proof of parliament’s revival as well as the prevalence of minor parties holding the balance of power. Another argument is the new founded popularity of Question Time and debate. All though these arguments appear convincing, in reality they are far less so. Although minor parties occasionally do hold the balance of power their effects on legislation are at best minimal, John Cain (premier of Victorian in late 80s and early 90s) proved that ‘selective proclamation’ was an effective way of getting around minor parties, this technique could be used in Federal Parliament quite easily, the people’s mandate is another way of discounting minor parties. The Senate power is often overstated despite it sometimes being seen as the ‘2nd coming of Parliament, A,Smith’. Earlier this year with WorkChoices the Senate proved that it will always bow to the Lower House no matter what. Committee’s in the Senate have improved but its recommendations are not always acted upon, the Republic and New Zealand Committee Reports are proof of this. Finally Question time may look impressive but as Smith points out its ineffective and demonstrates the lack of behavior and respect in parliament which further leads to its decline.
Sometimes its seems unpopular to support the ‘Decline Of Parliament’ thesis but all facts support this belief. The Revival Of Parliament is something that we would all like to believe in, but the decline in the lower house far outweighs the ‘revival’ in the upper house (Also let us not forget that the Senate also has party loyalty problems and its real role as a ‘States House’ was destroyed long ago, the supposed revival of the Senate will never justify its destruction as the ‘States House’). Reform is needed to counter the decline but party loyalty and constitutional change measures will always halt this. Parliaments role will always be a changing one, but in this case it has changed for the worse.
| 130 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
